WASHINGTON – House Democrats invoked the name of slain Florida teen
Trayvon Martin on Tuesday as they filed a challenge to Arizona’s SB
1070, the immigration law to be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court next
month.

The friend-of-the-court brief
from 68 Democrats – including both from Arizona – argues that SB 1070 is
unconstitutional because it pre-empts federal authority. Southern Arizona's U.S. Rep. Raúl
Grijalva led the push for the brief.

But much of the discussion at Tuesday’s news conference centered on
Martin, the unarmed black teen killed by a neighborhood watch volunteer
who said he was acting in self-defense when he shot the hoodie-wearing
youth last month.

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas, said a law like SB 1070
will give police “the right to be judge and jury,” which could have
disastrous results “in a nation where we all are different.”

“In one case, a hoodie equals suspicion,” she said. “In another case,
it is a tanness of your skin, or the coloration of your skin, or maybe
the configuration of your face.”

Supporters of the law called references to Martin an “unfair
comparison,” noting that Arizona’s law only applies to police officers –
not neighborhood-watch volunteers.

“SB 1070 only allows police officers to question suspected
immigration status,” said state Rep. John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills.
“To invoke the name of that recently killed teenager sensationalizes and
emotionalizes a debate that should be logical or rational.”

The debate moves to the Supreme Court on April 25, when the justices
will be asked to decide if SB 1070 is an intrusion on federal authority,
as the Justice Department claims.

House Democrats said in their brief that it is. They call on the high
court to affirm the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision
blocking the 2010 law “because the Framers vested authority in Congress,
not the several states, to determine how federal immigration law is
enforced.”

“Arizona should not be able to usurp Congress’s authority through SB 1070,” the brief said.

At the news conference releasing the brief, Grijalva said SB 1070
would promote an unconstitutional system of “patchwork immigration laws
from one state to another” instead of consistent enforcement throughout
the country.

“Whether or not it (immigration reform) has been neglected … by
Congress still doesn’t give the authority to the state of Arizona, to
the state of Alabama, to the state of South Carolina, to set their own
policy,” Grijalva said. “This is a federal responsibility.”

Rep. Ed Pastor, D-Phoenix, said the issue in the SB 1070 challenge “is to uphold the supremacy clause of the Constitution.”

Pastor and Grijalva were joined by a handful of other lawmakers, many
of whom said SB 1070 will open doors to racial profiling in Arizona.

But Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who co-authored SB 1070,
noted that the Justice Department has not made racial profiling part of
its lawsuit against Arizona, which he said is proof that racial
profiling is not an element.

“SB 1070 is about trained police officers making arrests, not
untrained civilians taking the law into their own hands,” Kobach said.
“As far as the text of SB 1070, it expressly prohibits it being enforced
with regard to a person’s race, ethnicity or national origin.”

He said the Democrats’ brief could not point to “a single federal law that SB 1070 conflicts with.”

Kavanagh, an SB 1070 co-sponsor, also dismissed claims that the law
is unconstitutional or that it will lead to racial profiling.

2 comments on this story

I think Grijalva is being too paranoid. If people were truly discriminated based upon looks, then Grijalva would be denied access to any all-you-can-eat buffet in this country…and obviously, that hasn’t happened.

This is, by far, one of the stupidest things I have ever read anywhere on any topic.

The difference between the Supreme Court and the idiots mentioned in this story is the Supreme Court will most likely take the few minutes required and actually READ THE DAMN LAW!!!

I would really hate to see our society devolve to a point where distortion and outright lies become successful arguments in the Supreme Court. But, I have faith that SCOTUS will do the right thing in this case. The open borders crowd really don’t have a case here…hence all the lies.

Yes!

I want to help TucsonSentinel.com offer a real news alternative!

We're committed to making quality news accessible; we'll never set up a paywall or charge for our site. But we rely on your support to bring you independent news without the spin. Use our convenient PayPal/credit card donation form below or contact us at donate@tucsonsentinel.com today.